Clinton, Trump, and the Changing Face of the Democratic Party

In 2008, President Barack Obama made history by becoming the first African-American president of the United States. With the 2016 presidential election coming up, this election is markedly dramatic—not only because the Democratic and Republican nominees are two of the most unfavorable candidates in U.S. history, but also because for the first time, a woman has been selected as a nominee of a major presidential party.

With the past eight years in mind and the next four years to look toward, one important question comes to mind: how do race and gender factor into the 2016 presidential election? I met with Marilynn Johnson, a professor in the history department, to take a look at the way these two controversial candidates are changing the way we look at the election.

There has been somewhat of a feminist revolution occurring more recently as a result of the election, Johnson said. It is expected that with a female candidate likely on the way to the White House, she would serve as a catalyst for this new feminist revolution. But according to Johnson, many argue that it is not Hillary Clinton serving as the catalyst, but Donald Trump.

“It has less to do with Hillary than it does with Trump,” Johnson said. “I know a lot of women my age and older that feel strongly about supporting Hillary because she is the first woman nominee and she is very experienced. However, it seems as though Trump’s rhetoric has made gender an important issue in the election.”

The rhetoric Trump has used throughout his campaign has been exceedingly controversial and divisive. From referring to Latinos as “bad hombres” to calling Clinton a “nasty woman” in the third presidential debate last month, Trump has received significant backlash from the public for his comments.

Trump’s comments about minorities, immigrants, and women are going to play a huge role in the election, especially when it comes to voters in these demographics. The rhetoric in the campaign has caused greater polarization in American politics than ever before.

“America has been polarized for quite a while, going back to the Reagan administration,” Johnson said. “It’s become so ugly and visceral in this election with the personal attacks, which makes the polarization that much more dangerous. Many people are questioning the whole system and whether or not you can accept the results. People not having much faith in the process is something new. The whole level of political debate has been pulled into the gutter.”

Johnson noted that the response to the sexual harassment allegations against Trump are more pronounced than they have been in the past, as women are now more responsive and critical of issues of sexual assault. Trump’s rise in politics and the rhetoric he has used have made it clear to many people that women and minorities still face a level of systemic gender and racial inequality that was arguably more surreptitious before, according to Johnson.

She also emphasized the importance of the effect that Trump has had on the Republican Party, essentially splitting it between pro- and anti-Trump camps.

“The major question of whether or not they will be able to put Humpty Dumpty back together again remains,” Johnson said.

When the Democratic nomination came down to either Clinton or Senator Bernie Sanders, it seemed as though younger women were more inclined to vote for Sanders. Why wouldn’t more young women and feminists want to immediately support the first woman president?

“Those ‘firsts’ aren’t important, because we can have a very good black president, but those race relations aren’t going to be resolved overnight,” Johnson said. “It’s the same with women. No matter how prominent your role is, systemic or inherent gender inequality is not something that can be changed overnight.”

Related Articles

“No candidate is perfect, and in almost every election, the ideal politician holds a combination of different forms of policy. If Macron can bring populist energy combined with effective economic policy, and make France inclusive, yet not beholden to the whims of the E.U., then France, Europe, and the world in general will benefit.” […]

3 Comments

With Obama’s liberal agenda and his bad decisions on a host of issues, he has ruined any chance of any black liberal from becoming president again, for a long time. He is responsible for doubling the debt to 20 trillion dollars and helped create the racial divide that has gripped the nation during his two terms.

Generally I agree with you, but if another black Leftist like Obama were to run again soon, countless Democrat voters would turn out for him simply because they feel swell voting for a groovy black Lefty; they’re going back to their pusher in the alley for some more of that great high they got in 2008 and 2012, and it really goes no deeper than that, unfortunately.
Mention of Obama’s negatives simply sounds like right-wing propaganda to them.